If there were prehistoric people, genetically similar to modern man, leaving elaborate paintings inside of caves, as far back as 32,000 years ago, then why did these people wait until 4000 years ago to being using these same skills to document history?
"The paintings are so fresh," Conkey says. "They look as if they were painted yesterday."
http://cas.bellarmine.edu/tietjen/Human%20Nature%20S%201999/new_light_on_the_oldest_art.htm
2007-11-20 07:51:18 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Prehistory means preliterate. Nothing more.
Illiterate people cannot document history.
2007-11-20 07:57:24 · answer #1 · answered by Sophrosyne 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The earliest written documents date back about 5,500 years.
And since the spoken word would have had to proceed the written word, speech must have developed not much earlier than 5,550 years.
The earliest cave paintings date back to about 32,000 years and are a method of documenting history.
That is a difference of roughly 27,000 years. In the scope of evolutionary change that is a minute amount of time.
2007-11-20 16:32:06 · answer #2 · answered by ndmagicman 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is much in the way of archaeology that we do not know about - many finds, which have not reached the mainstream media or consciousness - an example is from the site below, note there are many other such finds at this site - which shows you...
http://www.s8int.com/giants1.html
See the example of "Forbidden Archaeology" which is detailed elsewhere, how if one scientist refutes current dating and the known history of mankind, etc he or she is placing their career on the line, in which their career can get nowhere, if they are regarded as a renegade archaeologist.
There is the find of Yonaguni which goes against current thinking...
Also look up "Map of the Creator" regarding stone blocks found in Russia (near to China) in which a strange ceramic? is found... Is this authentic? Which dates to way back....
2007-11-20 16:01:21 · answer #3 · answered by TruthBox 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because they were recording history, in the only way they had available. Mankind hadn't developed a written language at that point, so cave paintings were a means of recording important events.
2007-11-20 15:55:18 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Up until the agricultural revolution, people were too busy hunting to have time to form a society and record history.
2007-11-20 16:13:38 · answer #5 · answered by Jonathan 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the answer is easy, man is still a man and a monkey is still a monkey, God made many species and in each species there are different kinds of sub species but they remain the same species. We make advances and we also get off track , like look at medicine why is ancient med. considered alternative when it is the first thing we had way before modern med. we are always rediscovering our past. but if you don't know your history then how do we know ware we are coming from
2007-11-20 16:00:48 · answer #6 · answered by mairszee 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Because the human brain was still developing and written language hadn't been developed yet. For a lot of those years they were still communicating with grunts and body language.
2007-11-20 15:56:41 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Things moved slowly before written language. Carbon dating works pretty well for this time scale.
2007-11-20 15:56:29 · answer #8 · answered by Herodotus 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
They were busy trying to survive....
The name of that website is in itself insulting....Saint Robert Bellarmine had Giordano Bruno, one of the greatest minds of Renaissance Europe, burn at the stake, and he (Bellarmine) was beatified...
2007-11-20 15:56:41 · answer #9 · answered by Lex Fok B.M.F. 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The real question is-are the paintings really 32,000 years old?
2007-11-20 15:56:25 · answer #10 · answered by Higgy Baby 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋